Waverley Borough Council Home Page Waverley Borough Council Home Page


Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Council held on 21/02/2006
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE – 7TH FEBRUARY 2006
SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL MEETING – 21ST FEBRUARY 2006



Executive 87
07.02.06
WAVERLEY BOROUGH COUNCIL
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE – 7TH FEBRUARY 2006

SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL MEETING – 21ST FEBRUARY 2006

(To be read in conjunction with the Agenda for the Meeting)
*Miss G B W Ferguson (Chairman)*Mr C H Mansell
*Mrs C E Savage (Vice-Chairman)*Mr K T Reed
*Mr S D Edge*Mr J E Robini
*Mr B Grainger-Jones*Mr V K Scrivens
*Mr P Haveron
* Present
Mr M W Band, Mr R J Gates and Mrs M V M Hunt were also present
Mr Gates spoke on Appendix G (Minute No. 213 refers)

209. MINUTES (Agenda Item 1)

210. DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS (Agenda Item 3)

Mr C H Mansell declared a personal and prejudicial interest with regard to Agenda Item 7 (Sponsored Organisation Scheme) as a Trustee to the Rural Life Centre and Farnham Youth Project. He withdrew from the meeting during consideration and voting on this item.

The following members declared personal interests and remained in the meeting during the respective items:-

NameItemInterest
Cllr Richard GatesItem 7, Item 11, Item 14, Item 307- Treasurer Bramley Age concern (supplicant to WVGP)
11 - Member Bramley Parish Council - Bus Shelters
14 - Possibly as Trustee JSJ Swimming Pool Trust
30 - Appointed member JSJ Swimming Pool Trust
Cllr Celia SavageItem 6, Item 7, Item 20, Item 30, Item 26, Item 276 and 30 - Waverley rep to Waverley Community Transport (Hoppa), Cranleigh Initiative, Surrey Transport Forum and West Surrey Passenger Transport Group and married to Waverley rep on Wey and Arun Canal Trust
26 and 27 - Member of Cranleigh Healthwatch which monitors provision of local health services
6 and 7 - married to Waverley rep on Cranleigh Arts Centre,
20 - Haslemere and Cranleigh CAB

Cllr Stewart EdgeItem 7 - Sponsored Organisation SchemeWaverley representative on the Farnham Maltings
Cllr John RobiniItem 6 Budget 2006/2007, Item 7 - Sponsored Organisation Scheme, Item 27 - Local Healthcare6 - works for Surrey Police, a partner agency;
7 - Waverley representative on Farnham CCTV Working Group, Haslemere and Cranleigh CAB, Haslemere Museum and Community Safety Consultative Group
26 - Chairman of Witley and Milford Patients Participation Group
Cllr Victor ScrivensItem 6 - Budget, Item 7 - Sponsored Organisation Scheme, Item 30 - Review of Outside BodiesWaverley representative on Blackwater Valley Network Member Steering Group, Joint Waste Strategy Consultative Board, SCC Forum on Minerals and Waste Disposal, Western Corridor Blackwater Valley Member Steering Group (reserve)
Cllr Byron Grainger-JonesItems 6 and 7Vice-Chairman of Surrey Hills Partnership and Waverley representative on Sport Godalming
Cllr Ken ReedItem 30Waverley representative - all bodies to which appointed by Waverley
Cllr Gill FergusonItem 7Waverley representative on the New Ashgate Gallery
PART I - RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

211. BUDGET 2006/2007

211. The reports of the Executive in respect of the 2006/2007 budget are set out at Appendix A incorporating:-


212. SPONSORED ORGANISATION SCHEME – APPLICATIONS FOR REVENUE FUNDING 2006/2007 (Appendix C)
[Wards Affected: All]

212.1 A total of 28 applications for revenue funding in 2006/07 have been received, 24 of which are from existing Sponsored Organisations and 4 are from new applicants. The four Citizens Advice Bureaux have submitted one joint application for 2006/07 rather than individual ones as in previous years.

212.2 In total, the funding requested by all organisations for 2006/07 was 679,438. Originally, no increases in grant were identified for individual SOS organisations but funding was proposed for two new organisations. Having considered the demands on the SOS pot as part of the budget process for 2006/2007, the Executive has agreed to increase the recommended grants in line with inflation (at 2.4%) and therefore the total SOS grant recommendations for 2006/07 are 571,010. The summary table detailing all the Sponsored Organisation Scheme applications is attached at Annexe 1. The recommended grants are shown in the last column of Annexe 1. It is also recommended that the contribution to the Waverley Voluntary Grants Panel (WVGP) in 2006/07 is increased from the current year’s level (with inflation at 2.4%) to 50,640.

212.3 Each application has been assessed against the Sponsored Organisation Scheme grant eligibility and criteria by the relevant ‘link officer’ within each service area. In addition, Waverley’s accountants have undertaken a financial assessment of each organisation’s annual accounts. The link officers, as part of assessing the grant applications, have taken the results from these financial assessments, together with information about organisations reserves policy, into account.

212.4 Where officers are proposing changes to the level of grant, these are set out below:-

Surrey Law Centre (decrease of 2,000)
Rural Life Centre (decrease of 3,000)
Haslemere Initiative (on behalf of Haslewey Youth Club) (new organisation, grant of 2,000)
Farnham Youth Project (new organisation, grant of 4,000).

212.5 It is recommended that the Surrey Law Centre’s Sponsored Organisations Scheme grant is stopped in 2006-07. Whilst the service provided by the Centre is valuable, officers have had to consider this grant alongside the pressures on the SOS budget and the level of funding for other organisations providing community advice such as the CABx. Waverley’s funding is only a small proportion of the Law Centre’s overall revenue. In addition, it is recommended that the Rural Life Centre’s grant is reduced as it has been the Council’s policy for officers to work with the Centre and assist them with one-off grants which help attract income.

212.6 The SOS applications were considered by each of the Overview and Scrutiny Committees in the January cycle of meetings and their comments were taken into account by the Executive. The Executive accordingly

RECOMMENDS that

Background Papers (DoF)

Sponsored Organisation Scheme applications.

213. INSURANCE FUND REVIEW (Appendix G)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

213.1 In June 2005, Members were informed of the outcome of the tendering exercise for the Council’s insurance policies. Following this report, Members asked officers to review the insurance fund and to report back to the Executive after the results of the housing transfer ballot were known.

213.2 The Council created two insurance funds many years ago. They are the

213.3 This report does not consider the Housing Revenue Account uninsured provision which is retained.

Insurance Reserve

213.4 The Insurance Reserve was established to counter the vagaries of the insurance market and to build a specific financial provision following the demise of Municipal and Mutual Insurance Ltd (MMI), a local authority owned company which provided insurance specifically to local authorities. In October 1992, MMI entered into a Scheme of Arrangement in an attempt to achieve a solvent run-off of outstanding claims following voluntary liquidation. Under the Scheme of Arrangement, the Council could be liable for an estimated contribution of 500,000, however, it is not expected that all of this will become payable as MMI moves towards a solvent run-off. The Council’s insurance broker has advised that other authorities are treating the provision differently, but many are providing a 50% sum. If this approach were followed, provision of 250,000 would be required.

213.5 As part of the Council’s tendering of insurance in 2005, officers tested whether a degree of self-insurance or a change in claims excesses was financially viable. Based on the market response, the Council’s exposure was left unchanged because no advantage was forthcoming. From 1st July 2005, the Council entered a 5-year long-term insurance agreement with Zurich Municipal. Whilst changes to insurance provision are not impossible in this period, they are fairly unlikely. In view of this, Members could consider using part of the Insurance Reserve for other purposes. However, this would not allow scope for future consideration of the self-insurance option at the next tender renewal.

Uninsured Items

213.6 There are a number of costs that are not insured, such as the excesses deducted from insurance claims, the costs of rectifying vandalism damage and the costs of repairing certain high-risk Council-owned assets such as bus shelters. The Council has never used the Insurance Reserve to cover these areas. These costs are generally covered by revenue budgets or specific Capital Programme items. This report suggests a continuation of this policy.

213.7 Asbestos claims have not been covered by insurance since 2002. The Council has undertaken extensive assessments, both Housing and General Fund, in an attempt to understand and mitigate future claims. Transferring part of the reserve for other purposes would force the Council to use other reserves and balances in the event of a proven claim. The Insurance Fund could be used to cover employee claims.

213.8 In the event of Stock Transfer, the Council would have been required to give environmental warranties to the new Registered Social Landlord (RSL). They would have cost in excess of 200,000, but are now not required.

213.9 The Council operates a contractual personal accident policy offering compensation for death or injury to staff whilst at work. Since 2002 the Council took the opportunity to buy insurance cover in the market at competitive rates which also increased the maximum loss covered in any one year. Whilst this cover is beneficial, it does not cover all contractual conditions, nor does it cover ongoing claims before 2002, one of which is in payment. In view of this twin cover, Insurance Fund plus external cover, Members could consider transferring part of the balance for other purposes. However, a minimum balance of 250,000 is recommended, recognising that uninsured claims in excess of this would need to be charged to other reserves and balances.

Risk Analysis

213.10 The decision to transfer 722,000 from the Insurance Reserve to the Revenue Reserve and 130,000 from the Insurance Fund to the Revenue Reserve would leave:

213.11 The Executive accordingly

RECOMMENDS that

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

214. REVIEW OF FINANCIAL REGULATIONS AND CONTRACT PROCEDURE RULES (Appendix H)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

214.1 In February 2003, the Council approved a major revision of Waverley’s Financial Regulations and Contract Procedure Rules. Officers undertook to review the adequacy of these documents each year and report back to Members, along with any proposed changes. Consequently annual reviews have taken place, and the most recent approved changes came into effect on 1st May 2005.

214.2 These revised documents introduced more flexibility in some areas and greater control in others and have been very successful in their first few years in operation. However, a number of practical and housekeeping issues have continued to arise which, after consideration by the Director of Finance, are now put forward as proposed changes.

214.3 The proposed changes to the Financial Regulations are detailed in Annexe 2 and the proposed changes to the Contract Procedure Rules are shown in Annexe 3. The changes are highlighted by underlining new text and crossing through existing text where a deletion is proposed. A number of the changes to Contract Procedure Rules have been made in order to simplify the process of updating them each year when the financial thresholds are revised. Rather than specifying values throughout, which require careful editing, a simplified approach is proposed whereby the thresholds are defined in CPR A101 and references thereafter are to the relevant threshold number.

214.4 As approved in February 2003, in addition to these changes, the main financial thresholds in the Contract Procedure Rules are increased by the Retail Price Index each year and then all limits, including those in the Financial Regulations, will be reviewed every five years. The amounts will increase by 2.5% (rounded) with effect from 1st April 2006 and these are detailed below:-

CPR Threshold per CPR A101Current Financial LimitsNew Financial Limits with effect from. 1-4-2006
1Up to 3,700Up to 3,800
2From 3,700 to 10,700From 3,800 to 11,000
3From 10,700 to 53,000From 11,000 to 54,300
4From 53,000 to 106,000From 54,300 to 108,600
5Over 106,000Over 108,600

References to these limits in Contract Procedure Rule A101, as outlined in Annexe B, and other documents will be amended accordingly.


214.5 Following approval by the Council, a full updated set of both documents will be sent to all members to update their copy of the Members’ Handbook. All officers will be notified that the updated documents are held on the intranet and all appropriate officers will receive training in March 2006.

214.6 The Executive

RECOMMENDS that

Background Papers (DoF)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

215. REPORT FROM THE HOUSING SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP (Appendix S)
[Wards Affected: All]

215.1 The Executive received a report from the Housing Special Interest Group (SIG) which met on 18th January 2006. It agreed to adopt the revised Terms of Reference for the current stage of the SIG's work, as set out at Annexe 1 to the report. 215.2 The Executive also considered a report proposing that the Council should adopt a programme of Trickle Transfer of up to 20 void Council homes each year to Registered Social Landlords.

215.3 The Council owns some 5,000 homes in the Housing Revenue Account. Each year approximately 300 homes become vacant and available for re-letting, following any necessary works. Such works can be fairly minor and properties can be turned around relatively quickly and at reasonable cost. However, of the Council properties that become vacant each year, around 15 homes need considerable expenditure on them before they can be re-let. Very often these are family homes where a longstanding tenant has not wanted nor asked for works to the home over many years. Others have structural or damp problems.

215.4 During the period April 2005 – December 2005 there were 12 properties that became vacant which needed expenditure in excess of 20,000. The total capital expenditure on these properties was 402,500. This equates to 33,541 per property. There are three months of the financial year to run. In 2004/05, 15 properties became vacant which required expenditure of over 20,000 each. The total expenditure in that financial year was 478,800. This equates to 31,920 per property. In 2003/04, 14 properties became vacant which required expenditure of over 20,000 each. The total expenditure in that financial year was 445,700. This equates to 31,835 per property.

215.5 The capital budget for 2005/06 contains a provision of 560,000 in order to fund major works to void properties prior to re-letting them. All properties are brought up to the Decent Homes Standard. However, a disproportionate amount of this budget is applied to relatively few homes. However, given the need to try to meet the Decent Homes Standard and to undertake works to tenanted homes, officers consider that this budget would be better applied elsewhere, were it possible to avoid expenditure on costly void homes.

215.6 It is therefore being proposed that one of the courses of action that the Council could adopt is that of ‘Trickle Transfer’ to registered social landlords of void Council homes that would cost in excess of 20,000 to bring back into lettable condition. The advantages of Trickle Transfer are that:

it accelerates progress towards the Decent Homes Standard for that property; it transfers the repairs and improvement cost to the Registered Social Landlord, and so the Council can use the ‘freed-up’ money on its remaining stock; the properties remain in the affordable housing sector; the rent for the property would be the same whether owned by the Council or RSL as rents are based on the same Government formula; the Council retains nomination rights; no capital funding is required from the local authority; the Council would receive a capital receipt for each of the properties transferred.

215.7 The disadvantages are

Loss of rental income to the Housing Revenue Account and the need to make commensurate cost savings; A further reduction in the number of homes owned by the Council and a continuing decline of the landlord service; Waverley tenants, particularly families, on the “Transfer List” will have rather less choice or opportunity to be transferred to a Waverley property and will have to seriously consider a move to a housing association home.

215.8 The Council would need to determine which housing association(s) it would wish to transfer the properties to. It is suggested that transfer should be to registered social landlords that already operate in the Waverley area. It is suggested that void properties in:

i. Cranleigh, Farnham Godalming and Haslemere be trickle-transferred to Downland Housing Association – as they already own homes for rent in Cranleigh, Haslemere and Farnham and have experience of trickle transfer elsewhere; and
ii. Homes in villages be trickle-transferred to English Rural Housing Association as they have particular experience of developing, owning and managing homes in villages and rural settlements.

215.9 In the light of recent experience, it is likely that each year around 15 or so properties will cost over 20,000 each to bring back into lettable condition. A Trickle Transfer programme can be reviewed at any time, should circumstances require.

215.10 Trickle Transfer enables the Housing Revenue Account to avoid significant capital investment in void properties that have structural defects or require major improvement works that are costly. Over the last three years, the Council has spent an average of 442,000 from its HRA capital programme each year bringing 14 homes back into lettable condition. Were the Council to avoid such expenditure through Trickle Transfer, capital resources amounting to around 442,000 could be released and invested in other Council homes, contributing to meeting the Decent Homes Standard.

215.11 The Council would also receive a capital receipt and under the terms of the General Consent must negotiate the best consideration that can reasonably be obtained. The Tenant Market Value (TMV) would reflect the fact that the property would remain as social housing available for affordable rent and that the Council would have nomination rights. The value would take account of the major works costs, as well as the improvement costs bringing the home up to the Decent Home Standard in a sustainable and long-term fashion.

215.12 However, the loss of housing stock through Trickle Transfer would result in the loss of rental income, which, in turn, would impact on the HRA. If 20 homes were transferred in any one year (assuming an average weekly rent of 80) the HRA would lose 83,200 of revenue income. As the number of properties reduce in the HRA, so do the Management and Maintenance Allowances by 1,367 per property at 2006/07 rates, an additional 27,000 loss of revenue for 20 properties. This would be mitigated by a reduced depreciation charge to the HRA. The Major Repairs Allowance (which affects the capital programme) would also reduce proportionately. At 2006/07 rates this would be 682.70 per property.

215.13 In 2005, the ODPM issued a General Consent for this type of scheme so long as no more than 50 vacant homes are transferred in any one year to a registered social landlord and the dwelling houses are in need of substantial works of repair or improvement. Larger numbers would need to be covered by a specific consent from the ODPM. The scheme being proposed comes within these General Consents. There would also be legal costs or resource implications in the Legal Section in respect of each disposal. There would need to be a Nomination Agreement between the Council and each of the RSLs involved.

215.14 The rents charged by the RSLs would be based on the same Government Rent Policy, which applies to both councils and RSLs. Tenants of transferred homes will have an Assured Tenancy.

215.15 The Executive supported the proposal and accordingly

RECOMMENDS that

Background Papers (DoH)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

216. FUNDING WAVERLEY'S SUPPORTING PEOPLE AND LANDLORD SERVICES (Appendix U)
[Wards Affected: All]

216.1 Some of the services provided by Waverley as a landlord are funded by the Surrey Supporting People scheme administered by Surrey County Council. In 2003, the Government introduced new arrangements whereby support services – such as sheltered housing, and supported accommodation for people with special needs for older/vulnerable/disabled people were to be funded from a central funding pool operated by the local unitary or social services authority – in Waverley’s case, Surrey County Council. This funding pool replaced a number of funding streams. The intention was to rationalise a number of separate funding sources, simplify arrangements and enable a more strategic approach to the allocation of resources.

216.2 Prior to this, most of the funding came through Housing Benefit and various other funding streams for example; Probation, Social Services, Housing Corporation and so forth.

216.3 One of the consequences of the new arrangements was that all the administering Supporting People authorities were given a cash-limited pot from which to make revenue grants to all local housing support services. At the time, it was recognised that there was a range of unmet need in Surrey – especially in respect of supported accommodation for vulnerable young people and those with complex needs for example. In order to fund new services that are deemed to be strategically relevant, it is necessary for the Supporting People authority to make savings from their cash-limited budget by reducing expenditure on existing services.

216.4 One of the areas that is not considered to be a high priority across Surrey is that of traditional sheltered housing. Waverley, as a landlord, is one of the largest providers of sheltered housing in Surrey. This context has implications for local services. Over the last 15 years, Waverley has developed services for older people on the basis of research, consultation and the changing climate of community care and local demographics. One of the key messages learned was that people moving to sheltered schemes wanted this to be a home for life with no further move to residential or nursing care, if at all possible. Tenants already in suitable accommodation in the community wanted to receive support at home which would enable them to stay put. Much other work by partner organisations bears out this approach.

216.5 The Council has ten sheltered housing schemes across the Borough. Each has residential twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week on-site staff presence. Applicants for housing are only allocated this accommodation if they can demonstrate a need for this type of housing and support. This service is targeted at the frail elderly or younger older people with complex needs.

216.6 Because of the relatively high level of staffing in Waverley’s sheltered housing schemes and the quality of services provided, the weekly cost of Supporting People to each resident is 34.90 per week, in addition to the rent and other service charges. The charge of 34.90 is met either through the Supporting People Team, where a tenant has limited means and needs the service; or is paid directly by the tenant; or in a reducing number of cases by transitional protection funding from Waverley.

216.7 By comparison with other sheltered housing providers who do not normally provide 24 hour cover and on site staff response, the Waverley service is relatively expensive. However, the outcomes for those who receive the service are good. Occupancy across Waverley’s sheltered housing remains consistently high at 99% occupancy of lettable stock. In 2004/05, only 2.7% of all residents moved on to care homes and only 2.4% of all residents moved on to nursing care homes – this compares very well indeed with other sheltered housing.

216.8 The Council provides a service to some 1,030 mainly elderly tenants in their own homes. Each of these homes has an alarm system connected 24/7 to Guildford Care Centre which provides the emergency response. Tenants using this service receive regular visits by trained staff. Visits can be weekly to three-monthly depending on circumstances and need. Because the staff are visiting so regularly the tenants are able to tell the staff about problems which can then be dealt with at an early stage. Tenants in receipt of this service have a weekly charge of 8.35 for Supporting People in addition to their rent and any other service charges.

216.9 The Careline service, which is a discretionary activity within the General Fund, underpins both the sheltered housing and community supporting people services by installing careline alarms in tenants’ property and managing the maintenance of all the alarm systems. The service also provides out-of-hours cover. The Careline service is not just available to Waverley tenants, but other private sector customers as well e.g. older people living in their own homes. The Council makes a weekly charge to individual customers of 4.05. There is an annual charge to cover all Council tenant users which in 2005/06 is 285,000 charged to the Housing Revenue Account.

216.10 One of the obligations placed on all Supporting People authorities was a requirement to undertake reviews of all services in receipt of Supporting People grant funding. Two of the Waverley services that receive Supporting People grant – Sheltered Housing and Community Supporting People Service – were reviewed during 2005.

216.11 In summary, the Review found that the services provided by the Council as a landlord were of a high quality, with well-trained and motivated staff, well-maintained accommodation and appreciative clients. However, the Review questioned the strategic relevance and value for money of the service. It also considered that the Community Supporting People Service needed to be refocused and address more clearly the assessed needs of users.

216.12 The review concluded that services could be remodelled in order to make cost savings, and in turn reduce the Supporting People Team’s grant commitment. At present the Supporting People Team makes a grant to Waverley of some 770,000 and they have proposed that this sum should reduce by 25% in the year 2006/07. Waverley officers have been disappointed that notwithstanding the positive aspects of the review, this still has resulted in a decision to substantially reduce their funding. It would be fair to say that this is more to do with the Supporting People regime's own financial constraints, rather than the services provided.

216.13Following informal discussions and representations with the Supporting Team, it has been agreed that the 25% grant reduction can be phased over a three-year period, subject to their annual grant settlement. So in 2006/07 Waverley will receive a grant of 693,000 (rather than 770,000); 616,000 in 2007/08; and 577,500 in 2008/09; it is hoped that these figures will have inflation applied to them. This report now considers how the Council’s landlord service can manage to operate with a reduced funding stream over the next three years.

Planning for the Future

SHELTERED HOUSING

216.14 Members have already recognised that there is not the demand for sheltered housing as there has been in the past. Indeed, in 2003 Mount Green Housing Association decommissioned one of its sheltered housing schemes in Godalming and replaced with general needs flats. Similarly, in 2005, the Council decommissioned Dorlcote at Witley. The Council has decided that Rowland House in Cranleigh should be decommissioned with a view to redeveloping the site in due course.

216.15 It is proposed that the Council should review the location, quality and demand for sheltered schemes and consult with tenants in this regard. There needs to be a longer-term view taken about a number of sheltered housing schemes – particularly those with unsuitable accommodation i.e. bedsits; shared facilities and those that cannot easily be brought-up to meet the decent homes standard. It would be worth noting that housing associations with sheltered housing schemes in the Borough are also having to review their services.

216.16Mindful of the comments of the Supporting People Team and how sheltered housing is managed by other providers, it is proposed that the 24-hour residential service at sheltered housing schemes be critically examined. Clearly, any such examination will need to ensure that the current outcomes for tenants are maintained. The Council should also continue to work with the County Council’s Adults and Community Care Service to develop ‘Extra-care Sheltered Housing’- which currently enables 24-hour care at Riverside Court and Falkner Court in Farnham. It is hoped that this model could be developed elsewhere.

COMMUNITY SUPPORTING PEOPLE SERVICE

216.17 Over the past year the Community Housing Officers who provide this service have been carrying out needs assessments and providing tenants with support plans. This exercise has identified that the majority of tenants consider the alarm system to be important as it provides them with both security and peace-of-mind. However, they also appreciate the visit they receive from staff and their frequency, but recognise that whilst this is a desirable service, the visits are not absolutely necessary.

216.18 This is an area that the Supporting People Team consider should be scrutinized further and that the visiting service should be better focussed on those who actually need it – rather than the current ‘blanket’ approach. Furthermore, the Community Housing officers have identified that some tenants with long-term conditions (e.g. sensory impairment, dementia, physical disabilities) need a more regular visiting service to help them maintain their independence in the community.

216.19 Experience in the Community Housing Officer teams also shows us that tenants have short-term periods of crisis (often health related) when they need additional support in the community. In light of the above, it is intended to refocus this service so that it better addresses people’s identified needs, rather than the current ‘blanket’ approach. This means that some tenants will receive fewer visits; whilst others will receive more. There will also be a more responsive and focussed approach for tenants during periods of crisis.

216.20 In the current financial year the running costs, predominantly staff costs, of the various SP services are estimated at 1,153,350. It is anticipated that SP grant will fund around 770,000 of this and Waverley the remaining 383,000. It is estimated that total support costs in 2006/07 will reduce by some 40,000 as a result of the closure of Dorlcote, but with a proposed reduction in grant of some 77,000 Waverley will be funding an increased amount of some 417,000. Without a review and re-structuring of the support services this would increase to 494,000 in 2007/08 and 532,500 in 2008/09. The restructuring of the various support services will need to achieve changes that leave a viable service but one that is sustainable at a lower cost.

216.21 Over the coming months, officers will make proposals to re-configure services in consultation with tenants and will return to the Community Overview and Scrutiny Committee/Executive with further reports in this respect.

216.22 The Executive

RECOMMENDS that

a. review the demand, location and quality of accommodation;
b. review the residential on-site staffing in Sheltered Housing service;
c. refocus the Community Supporting People Service; and
d. consult with tenants affected by any proposed changes; and

124. appropriate budget reductions be made in 2006/07, 2007/08 and 2008/09 in line with reduced income from the Supporting People grant, which at this stage amounts to: 37,000; 77,000, and 38,000 respectively.

Background Papers (DoH)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

217. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC (Agenda Item 33)

The Executive

RESOLVED that, pursuant to Procedure Rule 20 and in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded during the meeting during consideration of the following item on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during the item, there would be disclosure to them of exempt information (as defined by Section 100I of the Act) of the description specified in the appropriate paragraphs specified within the minute for the item.

218. DIRECT PERFORMANCE OF REQUIREMENTS OF AN ENFORCEMENT NOTICE (Exempt) Appendix AA)
[Ward Affected: Witley and Hambledon]

[Note pursuant to Section 100B(5) of the Local Government Act 1972: this item contains exempt information by virtue of which the public is likely to be excluded. The information is as specified in paragraphs 7 and 12 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, namely:

218.1 The Executive has considered a report on this matter. The report is contained at (Exempt) Annexe 4.

218.2 The Executive

RECOMMENDS that

125. the recommendations contained in (Exempt) Annexe 4 to this report be approved.
MATTERS OF REPORT

Part II – Matters Reported in Detail for the Information of the Council

219. REVIEW OF OUTSIDE BODIES (Appendix Z)
[Wards Affected: All]

219.1 The Executive received a report, previously considered by all three Overview and Scrutiny Committees, on the review of the representation the Council has on outside bodies where Council nominees are appointed. It has examined current practice and recommended ways to improve it where appropriate. The Executive has agreed that further reports on the final classification list, details of the member role description and guidance on legal and liability issues surrounding trustees should be reported back to Committees and the Executive in due course.

219.2 The Executive has

RESOLVED that

1. the survey of Outside Bodies be noted; 2. a system of classification against which the Council can select and prioritise organisations to receive formal representation from a Waverley appointed Councillor or representative be established, with particular reference to the benefit to be achieved by the representation for Waverley in each individual case; 3. ward Members should be encouraged to maintain links with local Outside Bodies and also encourage representation amongst Town and Parish Councils; 4. a clear role description be developed that could assist both Outside Bodies and Waverley representatives to understand their particular roles and to manage expectations, with particular reference to legal and liability issues;

5. a system of annual reporting by representatives be initiated, firstly a brief pro-forma if considered to be helpful (to be available electronically) confirming key information about the Outside Body be completed and returned to ensure the Council holds up to date information, as set out at Annexe 4 to the report and secondly, a short annual report on the activity of the representatives activities regarding the outside body to be introduced for publication on the Waverley website where appropriate, with the process being overseen by Committee Services; 6. appointments to outside bodies be made on a biennial rather than an annual basis in order to ensure a level of consistency of representation and reduce the work associated with appointments, such a system to begin in 2007, (and where possible the appointments made in 2005 should run to 2007), except for where a member wishes to resign as a Waverley nominee; and


PART III – Brief Summaries of Other Matters Dealt With

220. FOUR MONTH ROLLING PROGRAMME (Appendix A)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

221. PRUDENTIAL CODE FOR CAPITAL FINANCE IN LOCAL AUTHORITIES (Appendix D)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

RESOLVED that the Prudential Indicators 1 to 6, as outlined in the report, be approved.

222. EFFICIENCY STRATEGY (Appendix E)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

RESOLVED that

1. the requirements of the Government’s Efficiency Review be noted;

2. the Strategy for securing efficiency gains in 2006-07 and the key actions to be taken in the year, as set out in the report, be agreed;

3. officers be requested to complete the detailed returns within the timescale and in accordance with the Government requirement; and

4. officers be requested to monitor progress against the target during the year and report back to the Executive as appropriate, and that staff be informed of the Executive's recognition of the achievements so far.

223. TREASURY MANAGEMENT POLICY (Appendix F)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

RESOLVED that

1. the review of the current policy be noted;

2. the annual investment Strategy, as set out in paragraph 6 of the report, be approved;

4. the proposed LOBT3 for 2006-07, as detailed in paragraph 10 of the report, be approved.


224. FARNHAM YOUTH PROJECT – COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS GRANT (Appendix I)
[Wards Affected: N/A]
RESOLVED that

1. the Farnham Youth Project's request for an additional 12,000 funding towards its building regeneration scheme be agreed; and

2. this additional funding be met from the ring-fenced Community Partnership Fund balance of 41,162.

225. LEISURE CENTRE PROCUREMENT STRATEGY

This item was deferred until a future meeting of the Executive.

226. NATIONAL NON-DOMESTIC RATES – APPLICATION FOR RATE RELIEF (Appendix K)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

[Note pursuant to Section 100B(5) of the Local Government Act 1972: this item contains exempt information by virtue of which the public is likely to be excluded. The information is as specified in paragraph 7 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, namely:

RESOLVED that no hardship relief be granted, as set out in the recommendation in (Exempt) Annexe 2 to the report.

227. LOCAL STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS: SHAPING THEIR FUTURE – A CONSULTATION DOCUMENT (Appendix L)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that

1. the responses set out at Annexe 5 (now updated to reflect the changes proposed at the Executive) to this report be endorsed; and

2. the Chief Executive be authorised to agree the final submission, after consultation with the Leader and Portfolio Holder for the Environment, to strengthen the sustainability references, encourage Town and Parish Councils to respond and emphasise Waverley's existing close working relationship with Towns and Parishes.

228. PERFORMANCE INDICATORS – 2ND QUARTER (Appendix M)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

RESOLVED that the information provided in the report be noted.


229. EAST STREET REGENERATION – INTERIM REPORT (Appendix N)
[Wards Affected: All Farnham]

The Property and Development Manager reported that two further meetings with Crest Nicholson Sainsburys had been scheduled, the outcome of which would be reported to the March meeting of the Executive in order to meet the 12 week deadline set by the Council in December.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

230. REVIEW OF SERVICES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE (Appendix O)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that the findings of the Best Value Review of Services for Young People be supported and the draft action plan be endorsed and worked up into an action plan to be delivered by joint working with partner agencies, and it was also agreed to

1. include stronger references to sustainability;

2. make representations to Government and local MPs to lower the age for candidates for election to 18; and

3. actively seek a youth representative on the LSP and refer the report to the LSP for information.

231. CITIZENS' ADVICE BUREAUX (CABx) – DEMONSTRATION CENTRE PROJECT (Appendix P)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that a one-off contribution of 20,000 be made to support the demonstration centre project, to be met from the ring-fenced Community Partnership Fund balance of 41,162, and to support the establishment of the new district model Waverley CAB organisation.

232. UPDATE ON EQUALITY LEGISLATION AND THE COUNCIL'S RACE EQUALITY SCHEME (Appendix Q)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

RESOLVED that the progress made to date on the Council's approaches to equality of opportunity in general be noted and officers be asked to continue working towards the Council's Race Equality Scheme with members and come back with proposals for making faster progress.

233. SURRENDER AND RENEWAL OF LEASE – 11 AND 12 GUILDFORD ROAD TRADING ESTATE, FARNHAM (Appendix R)
[Ward Affected: Farnham Moor Park]

[Note pursuant to Section 100B(5) of the Local Government Act 1972: this item contains exempt information by virtue of which the public is likely to be excluded. The information is as specified in paragraph 9 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, namely:

RESOLVED that

2. the 'time of the essence' clause within the rent review be removed, and the lease be granted substantially on the same terms as the existing lease with other terms and conditions to be agreed by the Property and Development Manager.

234. CONTINUATION OF MEETING

At 9.49 p.m., in accordance with Procedure Rule 9, the Executive agreed that the meeting should continue until consideration of all business on the agenda had been concluded.

235. SUPPORTING PEOPLE – A CONSULTATION (Appendix T)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that

1. the consultation exercise being undertaken by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in respect of the Supporting People regime, be noted;

2. the draft response to the consultation paper at paragraphs 37 – 46.5 to the report be noted with the Community Overview and Scrutiny Committee's concern that existing programmes and new services need to be properly funded by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), Surrey County Council and Waverley Borough Council, in particular with the inflation provision; and

3. the draft response outlined in the report be submitted to the ODPM.

236. MODERNISING YOUR LOCAL HEALTHCARE – A CONSULTATION (Appendix V)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that

237. ENSURING A PATIENT LED NHS (Appendix W)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that

1. the report be noted;

2. the draft response to the consultation paper, as set out in the report, be noted; and

3. the Executive request that when the Strategic Health Authority has agreed the configuration of the new PCT, that the Council would wish to be actively involved in considering, with partners, the appropriate local NHS delivery arrangements.

238. LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT FOR SURREY (Appendix X)
[Wards Affected: All]

RESOLVED that the report be noted along with the opportunities it presents for service improvement, if or when the agreement is "signed off" by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister but it was also noted that the Executive remains committed to improving public transport in the Borough even if the Government does not recognise the scheme.

239. CALENDAR OF MEETINGS 2006/2007 (Appendix Y)
[Wards Affected: N/A]

RESOLVED that the draft Calendar of Meetings for the 2006/2007 Council year be approved, but the Chief Executive be authorised to review the date of the July Council meeting to see if it could be held earlier in the month. The final calendar for 2006/2007 is attached as Annexe 6 for information.

240. APPOINTMENTS TO OUTSIDE BODIES (Agenda Item 31)

240.1 Bishop Sumner Educational Foundation (Agenda Item 31.1)

RESOLVED that Mrs A E Mansell be appointed as the Waverley representative on this body until May 2007, as an observer only.

240.2 Hale Cottage Trust (Agenda Item 31.2)

RESOLVED that Mr V Duckett be appointed as the Waverley representative on this Trust until May 2007, as an observer only.

240.3 Frensham Parochial Charity Trust (Agenda Item 31.3)

One vacancy exists for this Trust which is offered to the Conservative and Independent Groups.

240.4 Farnham Youth Project (Agenda Item 31.4)

RESOLVED that Mrs C Cockburn be appointed to the Farnham Youth Project in an observer capacity only, pending the work of officers into legal and liability issues surrounding the role of trustees.

240.5 Outstanding Vacancies (Agenda Item 31.5)

RESOLVED that

1. Mrs J R Keen be appointed as a Waverley representative to fill the vacancies on the Haslemere Initiatives Forum and the Hindhead Playing Field Association and Dr M-G Lane be appointed to the Farnham Voluntary Service Council; and

2. the Conservative and Independent Groups be invited to fill the vacancies on the following outside bodies:-

i. Blackwater Valley Advisory Committee for Public Transport;
ii. Blackwater Valley Countryside Partnership;
iii. Farnham and District Sports Advisory Council;
iv. Farnham Park Group; and
v. John Stanley Jeffries Swimming Pool Trust.

241. 2006 PAY CLAIM (Agenda Item 32)

RESOLVED to note that negotiations were continuing.
The meeting commenced at 7.00 p.m. and concluded at 10.54 p.m.


Chairman
Comms/exec/2005-06/292